mgo.licio.us

"The face of the operation is Briatore (referred to exclusively in the film by his colleagues and angry, chanting detractors as "Flavio"), an anthropomorphic radish who spends most of his time at QPR plotting to fire all of the managers."

At press time, Harbaugh had sent Michigan’s athletic department an envelope containing a heavily annotated seating chart, a list of the 63,000 seat views he had found unsatisfactory, and a glowing 70-page report on section 25, row 12, seat 9, which he claimed is “exactly what the great sport of football is all about.”

A JD is usually more versatile than a PhD. I've heard that point argued elsewhere before. But, it really depends on what you want to do with that JD. It sounds like you're leaning toward "advocacy", and I agree with the other comments on this thread that a JD is not strictly necessary if that's what you want.

As for sticking around for an extra year -- really think that through very carefully. Not only are you adding time, you're accruing substantial additional debt, (unless you're fabulously wealthy and don't care).

Finally, I don't believe in the notion that getting any other degrees is necessary in your case. You've already earned a baccalaureate and are working on the post-graduate degree. Unless your intention is to collect degrees like baseball cards, stop there, and focus on your career. Chances are, you already have every thing you need to know, have a good employer who may be willing to help you achieve want you want, and just need to decide in which direction you're going to set out. Tend to that.

And if you have any doubt that I'm right, consider that Focus:HOPE was started by a parish priest and a housewife in the middle of riot-torn Detroit in 1968. Think of what Father Cunningham and Eleanor Josaitis have accomplished. There are no degrees you can earn for that. Its just a lot of hard work.

I'm not naive to the current "market" for lawyers, (I have a couple friends at Michigan Law who weren't able to secure summer jobs until very, very late), but what specifically are you referring to/should I beware of?

You'll be better and you'll be smarter and more grown-up and a better daughter. . .

Since you have a sense of what you want to do, I would ask yourself how a law degree will help you reach this goal. And I would suggest being pretty damn sure that a law degree will actually help you. Do you know the job you want to have? Do the people that have that job typically have law degrees? If you don’t have strong information that tells you a law degree is required, there are probably more direct degrees that will help you advance your career goals—degrees that are cheaper and less of a pain than a law degree. I don’t think you want a law degree unless you need a law degree.

Depending on what law school you go to and what financial aid you get, you could end up caring more about money than you ever intended. That because you could easily be paying $500-$1,500 a month for your student loans. If you go into public interest, it will probably be on the lower end, but that can still be significant because public interest jobs generally do not pay well.

I often wish somebody had cautioned me - not lightly suggested, but screamed at me and hit me in the mouth - against going to law school. This is not to say nobody with a law degree will find happiness, but it was the wrong decision for me, the wrong decision for many of my former classmates, and the wrong decision for many of my current colleagues.

Like so many of my classmates, I entered law school with thoughts of making a difference and left with a crushing debt. Public advocacy jobs were slim even when the legal market was booming, and I have to imagine they are now even fewer as graduates who have been rejected from Big Firm, LLP are circling like sharks. Incidentally, a law professor once mentioned to me that there are more students in law school (circa 2005) than there are practicing lawyers.

Like others, I eventually took a job to pay the bills. The pay is great, the hours are not. The work is worse and seldom rewarding. I try to remain optimistic about my practice, but it seems almost every practicing attorney I encounter, be it opposing counsel or the associate down the hall, is actively pursuing a back up plan to leave the profession.

As others have said, if your true intention is to make a difference in the community, specifically in the medical community, I think that can be accomplished without a law degree and the (potentially unnecessary) debt that follows. I would examine precisely why you are seeking a degree in law: is it for the knowledge itself? the socio-political connections? the license?

If it's the merely the knowledge, there are easier ways to obtain it. At this moment, there are thousands of quasi-lawyers sitting in prison cells with an in(ti)mate knowledge of the profession and access to nothing but a prison library. If you're seeking connections, events and fundraisers in your community can serve the same purpose. If its the license itself, inquire whether what you plan to do cannot be done without a license to practice law. Chances are, it can.

I tell interns all the time it's not too late to drop out of L school. $$$ if you want to owe someone (or now the gov't) lots of money and ultimately change your reason for entering law to pay those loans and work to pay off a mortgage but not have the house to show for it and maybe have some pretty good sex (or affairs), go to law school

I agree with the posters above who are wondering about whether or not a law degree is really the best path to achieving your goal of public policy advocacy. Although, knowledge of the law surrounding health policy is important. In order to get into an organization that is currently lobbying Congress (or whomever), a law degree is not necessary.

I also graduated from UM with a major in Pol. Sci. and now have a Ph.D. in Pol. Sci. My wife works as a women's rights advocate around the globe. In my opinion, getting involved in public policy advocacy requires the same steps you've taken in your current career. Get in at the ground floor somewhere, work your way up and make connections. It would also help to get some type of advanced degree in public policy along the way, but it is not critical and I wouldn't spend a lot of money on it. A Ph.D. in this area could help in some ways, as it would make you a more marketable "free agent" so to speak, but again not necessary.

As a current medical student, it's phenomenal that you've realized that you don't want to go into medicine BEFORE medical school. There are people here that went to med school just because "that's what I always wanted to do" - when it was really just what they thought they should do, or because mom or dad is a physician. They never realize what it takes, and if they aren't 100% committed to make it through, they fail and feel awful about themselves and their lives. Unfortunately, there isn't much from the physician side of things that you can really do to affect policy change - the "powerful medical groups" are made up of people who have no real basis of policy. As far as helping in underserved areas, as a singular physician, there is not much one can do. You need to have the background in policy to make changes, to get the respect that you need at a political level. It's also important that you keep those physicians as allies, because their support through medicine will be important in your quest. We are trying to set up a free clinic in town for the underserved, and are running into two blocks: 1. We don't have any policy backers that can be our face, and 2. We don't have actual medical expertise to run the thing properly. Therefore, the city, and the college, are putting the kabosh on it. For now, at least.

Good luck in whatever you end up doing. Take it seriously, as I'm sure you will. And as far as the age thing is considered, don't worry about it. I took some time off before med school, as did a lot of my peers. I know plenty of people in Law school, as well, that aren't the "traditional" student. And 26 is not old - otherwise, I'm screwed.

I'm in a reasonably similar boat, actually. I graduated from William and Mary in 2005 with a BS in Neuroscience; at the time, I decided to put off graduate school because my father was very ill, and I knew that I could get a job near my parents and help provide support. I worked for 3 years as a biomedical engineer, which paid well, but wasn't very satisfying. During that time, I took night classes anticipating completing my MS in Engineering Mechanics.

I slowly realized that I really didn't enjoy engineering, but I loved doing the math that it involved. So I completed what amounts to a BS in Math (~45 semester hours in math) and came to OSU to do my PhD. Before I even got my application put in, I realized that I couldn't spend 5 years in school being poor while my wife worked (she's a little older than I am, and we want to have kids before we're 40).

So now I'm 27 and getting my M.Ed in math education at OSU. Yeah, I understand what it's like to reconcile what you want to do with a more stable option. You may find that Law doesn't hold your interest forever, either. Changing careers isn't the end of the world - sure, it can be stressful (particularly if you have responsibilities outside of "I need somewhere to sleep and something to eat"). Whatever you choose to pursue, though, you should do as well as you possibly can. If you're worried about regrets over choosing the less ideal but more realistic option, you can be assured that if you half-ass it then the regrets will be even harder to deal with.

In addition, remember that you are not what you do. For overachievers (and Michigan grads...I kid!), identity is often conflated with achievement. As hard as it is, try to maintain a separation between the two. It's very easy to have an identity crisis and get depressed because you haven't achieved as much as your peers who may not have changed careers 3 times.

Just some thoughts. I'm currently going through a similar situation, and I realize how ragged it can make you. Keep your chin up, though.

Your job or career or whatever you want to call it will have some aspects that piss you off. I love what I do, and I like the people I work with but sometimes the office is the last place I want to be.

My point is that just because you think you will love something or are passionate about it, doesn’t mean that it will be all puppy dogs and ice cream when you arrive.

Is the juice worth the squeeze? No one can answer that besides you because we each have our own idea of what happiness is. (minus back to back national championships)

I'm an old grizzled bastard 30 years working for tiny start-ups and huge corporations.

I found it took quite a few years to hone in to what I liked and what I was good at. Until you do something firsthand it's sometimes hard to make that determination. I'm really up for trying incremental change. Can you try what you want on the side, can you do it as a volunteer, and can you grow your current job responsibilities to add more of what you want to do?

A friend of mine quit his Engineering job at Chrysler (in his late 30's early 40's) to become a fine wood worker. Attended a prestigious wood working school in Northern California (yes they actually exist). Loved it and found out he could not make a living at it. Now maybe it was more a sabbatical than a career change but he is back as an engineer. He could have done much of what he needed to do without quitting and bearing the associated financial penalty.

The question is can you do what you what to be fulfilled incrementally without quitting, going to law school and accumulating debt? What if you do all that and find it's not exactly what you wanted? Test the water first if you can, see what incremental options existing to see if this is truly your life's goal.

I have a job now where I make up my job. How and what I do I largely control. Yet I work for a massive company where you would not expect this kind of flexibility. It took a few years to get to this point but it's really cool now.

This will mostly echo what other people have been saying, but I think it's worth you hearing it from as many people as possible: don't take on $150,000 in debt to go to law school. Especially not if you want to do relatively low-paying work after you graduate.

If you really think law school is the best way to get where you want to go (and think hard about that), study for the LSAT more seriously than you've ever studied for a test. Apply broadly so you'll have more chances to get scholarship money. If your LSAT score is above the 75th percentile score for any school, there's a chance they'll throw some money your way. Also apply for any public interest law scholarships you can find.

Imagine how you would feel right now if you had $100,000 in debt and couldn't make the career change you want. Don't let that happen to you four years from now.

Who has never been completely satisfied with any of his career choices, I can tell you that your best option might be to stay where you're at, in terms of the firm, and ask if there are opportunities available to start gaining some experience doing what you really like best. You'll find that some employers (and it appears your current employer may be one) are very willing to help bright, motivated people to take on roles that excite them the most. In other words, grow the role you have now into the one you want it to be.

The advice from "Beeks", above, is worth remembering, (he did get thown into a cage with the gorilla at the end of that movie, but he and the ape have been happily involved since the 1980s, so it worked out). Don't underestimate the amount of stress involved, especially after dropping beaucoup bucks on law school, only to find it didn't provide the path you thought it would. Other than "law" and "policy" what about a legal degree makes you think you're going to be any closer to a career in health policy?

It sounds like you need to do some due diligence regarding a law degree. A basic J.D. is going to involve a lot of studying of torts and the like, without so much as a chapter on health policy. Be sure you know what you're getting yourself into.

Do your homework regarding the path you want to take. Have you talked to anyone in the field, asked about how they got to their current positions, and asked for their advice for your own career path? Between faculties of the Ford School, the School of Social Work and the Medical School, you should find plenty of people who are able to help you.

I'm farther down the road of that decision (by about 10 years) and haven't looked back. I made no money for awhile and it was somewhat difficult financially (although not a burden), but right now I'm pretty close to being out of debt and I am in a career I absolutely love.

In my opinion, your choice is easy. You clearly want to do some type of high-level policy work. Whatever it takes to get there--schooling, debt, internships, etc--go do it.

At your age I wouldn't hesitate to change career paths that end in following your dreams and desires. I too am changing careers but in a different venue.

I started off life wanting to go into law enforcement (federal) and then changed to teaching. Ended up going into the business world and have been working in supervision for 12 years now. I am now 40 years old and about to embark upon another career change although to me its not a career, its a calling. I have just turned in my application to begin working toward ministerial credentials. I feel called to minister to children and i also feel called to do so with those whom society has rejected such as those in poverty. Its no longer about money to me but about serving and following a higher call.

I applaud your desire to work in advocacy. Follow your dreams and keep your eyes upon the goal.

My real advice is to find out what you really want to do. I find that for political science types (I have a BA in PolSci), law school is often a default choice and is littered with people who went into the career to "make a difference". I'm not anti-law, but you should be sure it's what you want to do. Do you enjoy conflict? Not all law requries conflict, but most does, and the track that you want to pursue will. Perhaps, if you were to work at a law office for a while, even a couple days, you'd know if it is for you or not. Another important point. You may not be materialistic, but going to law school will put a HUGE debt burden on you - at least $100k - which you will take years to get out from under. Not to mention the fact that public interest law is very poor-paying work in general.

I realize I am sounding negative, so let me give you some (I hope) useful advice:

1. Take an MBTI personality test. You can pay for the full-blown one or you can do an on-line assessment to get an idea of who you really are. Examples:

2. Based on your personality type, figure out what you will be really good at and what you will love. The websites above will help, and you can purchase a book called "Do what you are", which maps personality types to fitting careers:

Now honestly, I haven't quite found my match in life and I'm 40. I don’t hate my job, I like it “fine”, but it’s not that rewarding for me either. I'm a searcher like you are and I would not be surprised if we are the same personality type. But I have avoided some big mistakes for me, such as law (this would have been a disaster for me, and I even went to orientation at a law school before figuring out it was not for me). You might prefer something like a master’s in public policy where you can work in a DC think tank or non-profit and help support a cause you believe in.Take a look at:

I agree with the majority of the repsonses that you are definitely not too old. I, seemingly like everyone else that has responded to the OP, went through a career change as well. I always wanted to be an architect as a child, and right before I went to college I had a sudden change of heart and went to mech. engineering school. Three years in I wondered why I had changed my mind in the first place, and started taking classes in the college of visual arts. I dropped out for a while and then transferred to another school and got a five year B. Arch degree. So I "wasted" five years, and sat through a great economy. I graduated near the top of my class as the building sector began to go south-quickly. Even though I picked the worst possible time to graduate I know now that architecture is the profession for me. Do what you love, or what you think you love at the time, life's too short for anything else.

some of the responses makes me feel better about my situation (a few months out of college, no plan/clue/idea of what to do now). For the time being, after re-reading "The Age of Miracles," I think I'll go check out the latest version of Tropico.

I graduated from UofM in 1996 with a BS in Mech.Engineering. I worked in 4 completely different fields (engineer, head-hunter, furniture designer, sales rep.), and at 33 went back to law school. I now have the $150k in debt and no job. My advice is talk to as many lawyers as you can before taking the plunge and see if it sounds interesting. If you like it, money will follow OR it won't matter as much.
Also - there are all kinds of loan forgiveness programs if you work for a non-profit, so you can take a low-paying advocate job and not be penniless.
I'm more than happy to have an off-board email chat if you are interested in talking more about my experience. And best of luck in whatever you do, I'm sure you'll find success.
EDIT: My dad once told me, "Son, if you know what you want to do by the time you are 50, you are in pretty good shape."

Drink a pint of tequila, 12 beers and start one post about Justin Boren in bad taste and end up with - 590 points.

so sorry if this is repetitive. Also, sorry for any elitism contained in this post. I'm a recent law grad with a good job so I can offer some perspective.

Make sure the law school you go to has an excellent LRAP (loan repayment assistance program).

No, really, MAKE SURE YOUR LAW SCHOOL HAS AN EXCELLENT LRAP PROGRAM.

Okay. If you are truly going to pursue a policy-related job, understand that you will not make nearly enough to service your loans. LRAP, which is usually only at top schools, will pay your loans off if you commit to a public interest type job. This should be one of your top priorities in selecting a school.

I'll be blunt--the legal job market is in shambles. Complete and utter mess. Big firms have cut back hiring by 60-100% and are laying people off. This means all legal jobs are at a premium and everything is hyper-competitive. Things may improve by the time you graduate, but remember that most legal jobs are earned in the summer of your 2L year.

I'll be even blunter--if you can't get in a USNEWS top 20 or so program (only the top 14 or so are truly national degrees), do not go to law school. The value of a law degree is SERIOUSLY shaky right now. Even a full-ride at a top 50 or whatever school is a losing proposition--3 years of salary opportunity cost for a ~15% chance at a decent job.

Other random advice: ignore average reported employment stats for schools, they are doctored and false. Ignore all subspecialty rankings - being the "#3 law school for international space law" doesn't mean anything to employers, even if they specialize in international space law. If you get a degree from a regional law school be prepared to stay in that region, possibly forever. Student loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy, and Michigan's tuition was over $44,000 last year.

of an exercise to get people to consider the foregone salary from 3 years at school. Many forget that piece of the puzzle and view a full ride as a costless opportunity. Also, the scholarships are often at lower ranked schools than the applicant could otherwise get into. Taking the lower ranked school is always a HUGE gamble, even when attendance is "free," because getting any sort of job from some lower-ranked schools requires top 30% or so grades. The rest are fucked, for the most part.

If anyone thinks I'm overstating my argument, ignore this advice at your own peril. Do a lot of research before taking the plunge.

all grads who work a community/state/public welfare job get the loan forgiveness after 10 yrs. also your advice on not going to law school except if you can get into top 20 is bullshit. she has a niche that is usually created for you by succeeding at a top 20 school. she's motivated, knows her field and is probably 10x more competent than her 1L peers when she goes. this gloom and doom crap is just that: crap.

Sorry, no one cares about past experience if your grades cannot get you through the door. The lower your school is ranked, the more impressive your grades have to be. During 1L, everyone is on equal footing, everything is on a curve. A person may or may not achieve the grades necessary to get a job where they want to be. The risk increases greatly as the name on the diploma loses value.

i know people who already have jobs who had mediocre grades but were heavily niched in their education and experience. if you're trying to apply with 500 other recent grads for a firm job, sure you make sense. but your advice is specifically tailored to someone trying to do corporate law. her desire to do advocacy and the like allows her to tangent into local/state political areas during her summers so that she walks into THAT and perhaps not even have to go through a job hunting cycle

again, you didn't tailor any of your responses to her MO. you tailored it to "generic law school graduate." further you said if she couldn't get into top 20 don't try - not to go and be top 20 in her class at whatever school it may be.

Anecdotal. There will always be exceptions. People should be risk-averse when deciding if they want to go to law school.

The "go be top 20" line made me laugh out loud. You've been to law school and you know how arbitrary exam grading is. Everyone thinks they will be top 10%...only 10% will be. Plus, everyone is gunning like hell these days for good grades and when on a curve, that just means you have to outgun the gunners. Good luck if that sounds doable.

but you're the epitome of the pot calling the kettle black. i was talking about YOUR advice. i would never say someone should only go to law school if they think they're top 20 in their class. i was saying that was as far as your advice should have gone and not the top 20 schools in the country line.

i think she could be in the 50th percentile and be fine. it's about finding your niche. everyone in law school is struggling to figure out what type of lawyer they want to be - if you go in knowing, you have a lot more time to extra curricular within the general field and be that much more ahead.

"if you go in knowing, you have a lot more time to extra curricular within the general field and be that much more ahead."

Bingo. This is exactly right. I knew exactly what I wanted to do the day that I started law school, which gave me the ability to seek out every possibly area for growth within that area from day one. I was essentially able to tailor my J.D. degree to be a mini LLM (rather than taking a little of this and a little of that) because I knew exactly what area I wanted to practice in. I think a lot of time when people give advice they get trapped in the general "I didn't know what I wanted to do when I went to law school so that means that no one does" mindset when that is totally not true for everyone. In my experience, this is why second (or third) career lawyers excel in the practice of law. They might not be the best law students, but (from my personal observation) tend to get hired more quickly and do better once they start practicing.

What you describe is definitely true for people that do not change their plans over three years. I was envious of the people that knew what they wanted when they arrived and left with a jump start on that path. If your goals the year after law school are the same as they were 5 years before, everything you say is true (and I assume the unintelligible sentence you quote is true as well).

Most people I knew had a plan on day 1, though, and most changed their plan.

law students on day 1 who say they want to work at a firm = 30%
students who interview when firms come for on-campus interviews = 80%

Oh I agree with you completely. Most people will change their minds. Although my experience was that second career students were more likely to stick to their original plan. I'm definitely different in this respect, as I knew exactly what I wanted to do on day one and I am doing exactly that today.

50th percentile people are having trouble finding jobs even at top 5 schools. You keep talking about finding niches but, as I said before, this is RISKY--specialized fields are hiring less or not at all at the moment, just liek firms. With the remaining spots, they are flooded with high quality applicants that couldn't find the firm job they wanted or with biglaw refugees/layoff victims (i.e., people with experience) and everyone else.

The school you go to is an insurance policy. Further, it can be determined in advance of you making any financial committments--if you don't like where you got in you can simply not go. If you commit to a school then your grades aren't where they need to be (i.e., 50-90% of people, depending on where you want to work and where you are attending), you are straight up screwed. Remember, your grades in each class are based off of one exam. You will take something like 8-10 tests and then your fate is pretty much sealed as far as the job you will get. Only 1L grades matter. Sick the day of an exam? Have something on your mind? Get a question or 2 you aren't ready for? Bad under pressure? Sorry, that's 150k and 3 years of your life out the window.

If you got lucky or know some people that did, I'm truly happy for you/them. I got lucky myself. But to ignore the real obstacles people entering law school right now will face is just wrong. You are doing people a disservice to just say "it will all work itself out." It may not. And the consequences are huge.

"You will take something like 8-10 tests and then your fate is pretty much sealed as far as the job you will get. Only 1L grades matter."

This is a total load of B.S. and an extreme over-generalization. I actually have a hard time believing that you seriously believe that "only 1L grades matter". That is only true if you have nothing else to differentiate you from everyone else and if you are specifically looking for a big firm job, which (1) most people don't end up working in big firms and (2) the OP isn't looking to work in a big firm.

Almost all schools use the one exam method, particularly for 1L classes. This isn't an iron-clad rule, but it is nearly universal (still). Upper level courses can have papers and all the other stuff, true.

Most people (even outside of firms) get jobs from their 2L summer job/internship. True, many public interest jobs do not work this way. Hell, some won't hire you until you pass the bar. Regardless, you will be making your connections/handing out resumes early on in law school. 1L grades are HUGELY important and 2L/3L grades are veeeeeery unimportant in comparison. Most employers know that upper level classes are useless fluff and grade-inflated, as well. I stand by my comments.

"Regardless, you will be making your connections/handing out resumes early on in law school. 1L grades are HUGELY important and 2L/3L grades are veeeeeery unimportant in comparison. Most employers know that upper level classes are useless fluff and grade-inflated, as well. I stand by my comments."

I'm not sure where you went, or why you would have pursued a courseload that would have your 2L and 3L classes consist of fluff, but I would suggest that this statement strikes at the heart of why we see things differently. If you go and take fluff as a 2L/3L, then yes, obviously your 1L grades become much more important. However, if you pursue real substantive classes as a 2L/3L, then your 1L grades become much less important. I can't speak for anyone but myself, but my 2L/3L courses were what got me where I am right now and were significantly more challenging than my 1L courses. I specifically sought out the courses that would help me excel in what I wanted to do (which wasn't just to "get a job", but rather to gain the skills necessary to be proficient in the general area of law that I wanted to practice in). Obviously your response to me will be that my experience is anecdotal, but my overall point is that you are painting with fair too general of a brush. My other point is that if someone goes in with a plan for what exactly they want to accomplish in law school they will come out with a very different expereince from the one that you are describing.

and actually took some of the hardest upper-level classes there (e.g., securities regulation) because they were relevant to what I wanted to do and I'm not one to take the easy way out. As it turned out it didn't matter for employment purposes - I had an offer for full time employment before I even took these classes or had grades. Your mileage may vary.

But that's not even the point. Employers heavily discount 2l and 3L grades because they are often not on a curve and heavily theory-focused. It's like a master's program GPA--no one cares about it because it's always a 3.8 or higher. Employers are way more heavily focused on 1L grades, where everyone is taking the same classes and subject to equal pressures.

And yes, your story was anecdotal. It's very abnormal for an employer to take great interest in your class selection and give you an offer based on it. Most of what you learn in law school is never applied in practice. Having a plan in law school is a joke as well--very few do exactly as they planned, even if they are nontrads. The fact that we had plans and followed through on them doesn't change the general rule. Had I performed better I would have looked at COA clerkships. Had I performed worse I'd be at a smaller firm or government or something.

What is obvious in reading your posts is that you know about how your law school works and maybe not as much about how other law schools work. Maybe at your school 2L and 3L courses aren't graded on the normal curve, but that definitely isn't normal practice at most law schools. And seriously, your 2L/3L classes always result in 3.8 or higher? Must be nice. Our 3L/3L courses were curved on the exact same curve as our 1L courses. Sounds like grade inflation to me.

Also, the fact (if it is a fact) that employers don't take a great interest in 2L/3L class selection is downright foolish on their part, in my opinion, espeically in certain specialized areas like I'm in. I can say for 100% that I got my job offer in large part because of my 2L/3L class selection and how I did in those classes. I can also say 100% for certain that the people that I look to hire have to have taken and done well in those same classes or they aren't considered. I don't have time to teach people the basics of the area of law. That's something they should learn in law school since, you know, it's the law.

It's not so much that my job is an aberration, but rather it's reflective of the courses that I took. As I said in another post, I treated my 2L/3L years as a mini-LLM and focused heavily on the courses that would help me be more proficient at what I currently do. It's a combination of my work being highly specialized, taking a narrowly tailored core group of classes as a 2L/3L and being lucky that the law school that I went to is one of the few in the nation that has an LLM program in my area of law. So it's probably more safe to say that "I" am an aberration, not my job. On the other hand, my point from the outset here in my discussion with you (although not well stated) was that I am fairly certain employers do actually look at 2L/3L coursework IF there is any 2L/3L coursework of any substance. The fact that there typically is not is, in my opinion, more reflective on law students and law schools, rather than an employer's interest in considering it. Because, let's be honest, 3/4 (at least) of law students are there to take the easiest classes, get the best grades, and move on. In my experience, the second career students (and some traditional students) were more apt be focused on a combination of courses that would benefit them (regardless of difficulty) and courses that interest them. Just my observational opinion, though. I guess, at the end of the day, what we both need to remember is that the reality of the situation that were are discussing lies somewhere between each of our individual experiences.

I agree, for what she wants to do, there's no need to be at a T14. However, at that point, you really don't want to go too far into debt unless you are certain you're willing to work only public interest and live like a pauper (at least in many markets) for 10 years minimum. Many of even those jobs are not incredibly easy to get now, and it's harder at a lower ranked school if you're not at the top of your class. I don't think this is too doom-and-gloom. There are entirely too many law students and too few jobs.

The only other thing I'll say is that a ton of people come in as 1Ls assuming they're more competent than their peers, find out they're mistaken, and either 1) get debt they can't pay or 2) at many lower ranked schools, get cut after the 1st year. No reason to believe Jen is one of them at all, but I've never figured out really accurate predictors for that stuff.

for going to law school to have lawyering be an "option" while using the degree for the same general public interest elements of the OP and, eventually, to teach at the college level. i already have two BAs and an MA. i have no idea where i'm going to be or what i'll be doing in three months but even i am not as pessimistic as some of the people on here. education will always have value. dropping out after 1-2 yr might be where you regret the cost but someone with another degree will have their foot in the door if not for employment at least in life experience

Well based on how eager I am to get out of school, you certainly value education more than I do haha. No, I think as long as you WANT to be a lawyer, do whatever you want with it. The idea of using the JD purely as a means to an end, when actually getting one is so exhausting, expensive, and risky, is one I'd question.

I lucked out with all this due to my uncanny ability to win meaningless 3-hour typing contests. But I didn't know how I'd do going in, and I was going $150-200k into personal debt (which I've found it best not to think about). Had I known the legal market would be like this two years ago, I might have made a different decision, and I know many of my classmates might have too.

but after talking to professors and deans of programs i would want to teach in, i found that a polisci phd and a law degree can often be of the same value with one having almost solely academic value and the other having a business value as well. i'm waiting to see if MSU pulls their 97% passage rate again this summer and, if they do, taking the Barbri in E Lansing bc let's be honest, i don't care if it's Harvard, 97% passage rate is NOT how quality the law school is.

i want to work in the political process and a law degree would be required whether i'm an aide or the man himself. i'm 25 with two BAs an MA and a JD - i've got a lot of time to loathe myself should i regret the decision. as of now it's fine.

i graduate law school wednesday. it's rewarding. but the one thing that's relevant to you is that there is a federal program in place that if you work for the "communal good," meaning you work in some capacity for a non-profit or government (state and fed) position, for 10 years and make whatever the payments you are required, the rest of your loans are forgiven. so if you pay $300/month for 10 yrs and you racked up $150k in loans, $120k plus interest will be disappeared [sic].

if you have any questions about anything law school related, feel free to ask me.